v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization
v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization
320 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMING Literature on the max cut problem is vast because this problem has elegant primal and dual formulation, its solution is very difficult, and there exist many commercial applications; e.g., semiconductor design [104], quantum computing [338]. Our purpose here is to demonstrate how iteration of two simple convex problems can quickly converge to an optimal solution of the max cut problem with a 98% success rate, on average. 4.33 max cut is stated: ∑ maximize a ij (1 − x i x j ) 1 x 2 1≤i
4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAINT EXAMPLES 321 Because an estimate of upper bound to max cut is needed to ascertain convergence when vector x has large dimension, we digress to derive the dual problem: Directly from (733), the Lagrangian is [53,5.1.5] (1321) L(x, ν) = 1 4 〈xxT , δ(A1) − A〉 + 〈ν , δ(xx T ) − 1〉 = 1 4 〈xxT , δ(A1) − A〉 + 〈δ(ν), xx T 〉 − 〈ν , 1〉 = 1 4 〈xxT , δ(A1 + 4ν) − A〉 − 〈ν , 1〉 (734) where quadratic x T (δ(A1+ 4ν)−A)x has supremum 0 if δ(A1+ 4ν)−A is negative semidefinite, and has supremum ∞ otherwise. The finite supremum of dual function g(ν) = sup L(x, ν) = x { −〈ν , 1〉 , A − δ(A1 + 4ν) ≽ 0 ∞ otherwise (735) is chosen to be the objective of minimization to dual (convex) problem minimize −ν T 1 ν subject to A − δ(A1 + 4ν) ≽ 0 (736) whose optimal value provides a least upper bound to max cut, but is not tight ( 1 4 〈xxT , δ(A1)−A〉< g(ν) , duality gap is nonzero). [132] In fact, we find that the bound’s variance with problem instance is too large to be useful for this problem; thus ending our digression. 4.34 To transform max cut to its convex equivalent, first define then max cut (733) becomes X = xx T ∈ S n (741) maximize 1 X∈ S n 4 〈X , δ(A1) − A〉 subject to δ(X) = 1 (X ≽ 0) rankX = 1 (737) 4.34 Taking the dual of dual problem (736) would provide (737) but without the rank constraint. [125]
- Page 269 and 270: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 269 whose rank
- Page 271 and 272: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 271 and where m
- Page 273 and 274: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 273 4.3.3 Optim
- Page 275 and 276: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 275 Initialize:
- Page 277 and 278: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 279 and 280: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 281 and 282: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 283 and 284: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 285 and 286: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 287 and 288: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 289 and 290: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 291 and 292: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 293 and 294: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 295 and 296: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 295 m
- Page 297 and 298: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 297 m
- Page 299 and 300: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 299 a
- Page 301 and 302: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 301 f
- Page 303 and 304: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 303 n
- Page 305 and 306: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 305 W
- Page 307 and 308: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 307 t
- Page 309 and 310: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 311 and 312: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 313 and 314: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 315 and 316: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 317 and 318: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 319: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 323 and 324: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 325 and 326: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 327 and 328: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 329 and 330: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 331 and 332: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 333 and 334: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 335 and 336: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 337 and 338: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 339 and 340: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 341 and 342: 4.7. CONVEX ITERATION RANK-1 341 fi
- Page 343 and 344: 4.7. CONVEX ITERATION RANK-1 343 Gi
- Page 345 and 346: Chapter 5 Euclidean Distance Matrix
- Page 347 and 348: 5.2. FIRST METRIC PROPERTIES 347 co
- Page 349 and 350: 5.3. ∃ FIFTH EUCLIDEAN METRIC PRO
- Page 351 and 352: 5.3. ∃ FIFTH EUCLIDEAN METRIC PRO
- Page 353 and 354: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 353 The collect
- Page 355 and 356: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 355 5.4.2 Gram-
- Page 357 and 358: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 357 D ∈ EDM N
- Page 359 and 360: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 359 5.4.2.2.1 E
- Page 361 and 362: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 361 ten affine
- Page 363 and 364: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 363 spheres: Th
- Page 365 and 366: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 365 By eliminat
- Page 367 and 368: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 367 where Φ ij
- Page 369 and 370: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 369 5.4.2.2.6 D
320 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMING<br />
Literature on the max cut problem is vast because this problem has elegant<br />
primal and dual formulation, its solution is very difficult, and there exist<br />
many commercial applications; e.g., semiconductor design [104], quantum<br />
computing [338].<br />
Our purpose here is to demonstrate how iteration of two simple convex<br />
problems can quickly converge to an optimal solution of the max cut<br />
problem with a 98% success rate, on average. 4.33 max cut is stated:<br />
∑<br />
maximize a ij (1 − x i x j ) 1<br />
x<br />
2<br />
1≤i